Boston T. Party's Battle Rifle

[Don't Tread On Me]

Boxcab, I meant no offense by that, nor did I mean to lecture. I was making a point about how a lot of people (not everyone, but most) are spending a whole lot of cash on a lot of nonsense these days. Just the nature of our generation. My grandparents wouldn't spend a nickel on a lot of the stuff I would.


Whenever I'm looking to get something that's a little bit out of my means (because I can't afford it), I sometimes sacrifice something else I don't value as much.


I don't like the M1A in this particular context. Why not get an AR-15 for $650 instead? Typically with those, you have to spend to get a good one, but I hear all sorts of great things about DPMS and others in that price range that for 99.99% of all practical uses and scenarios will be PLENTY fine. 5.56 is very effective.


For people looking for a freedom rifle, no need to go blow $1,500. I didn't. I spent $999 on an AR-15 made by Colt. I don't feel undergunned by that because Boston thinks that you must have a .308 battle rifle. Pure nonsense.

 

[boxcab]

All's Good!

Dont Tread On Me-

All is good.

Boston's Bible is a good read, though I do not see everything shaping up the way he does.

To those asking about Boston T. Party:

Protecting your home from looters or aliens may require a close quarters weapon, but there are other scenarios that call for the Battle Rifle.

The premise of the Battle Rifle is that when the Balloon goes up, and you have to fend an army off, you do not want to fight the way today’s army's do. We will not be able to put down sustainable suppressive fire at 100 or 200 yards. What we can do is be "Rifleman" and shoot from distances that today’s armies are not trained to engage. If you do not care for Boston and his writings, check out Fred's Rifleman’s pages here http://www.fredsm14stocks.com/rifles.asp

Lots of reading to make you think about how you will fight the fight for freedom if it ever becomes necessary.

Will you be a cook or a rifleman?

-Boxcab

 

[mkh100]

Im not so sure about the Saiga.....doesn't it have the same terrible sights as the ak? Ive watched several guys struggle trying to zero and hit their target with AK sights.....definantly not for distance shooting. Maybe with a scope or different sights, the guns are certainly priced right.

You will likely spend as much on an AR as a PTR, FAL, or chinese M1A and not have the power at distance that he's looking for, nor the cover penetration. I like AR's too but they are not "MBR's". No I dont wanna get shot with one. No Im not trying to start the 223 vs 308 debate.

The recent shotgun news (the big one with a color cover) has a good article on the PTR that might be of interest to you boxcab.

Let us know what you decide boxcab, Im curious to know.

 

[miko]

After reading BTP and playing with all the guns he mentioned and having served in the army and such (with AK-47/74), I went out and got myself a Remington 7600 Pump in 243 for less than $400

Some 10rd mags, 2-7x28 scope on quick-detach rings and probably a ghost-ring later and I have a very capable rifle that covers a lot of ground in practical applications, weights little and is reliable as heck.
Not being an evil semi-auto assault rifle, I can even have it in NYC or other locales.

Weight and legality were the decisive factors for me – I am not able to maintain shape that makes it easy to lug a 12-lbs rifle around and it is not going to improve with age.

I have personally seen it shot accurately and faster than I could shoot a semi-auto. At the same time the floating barrel is not much worse in accuracy than a decent bolt-action of comparable price - 1 MOA is not out of the question for that rifle with quality ammo.

I’d feel pretty confident with it at ranges from 50 to 400 yards, but a good sniper should be able to engage up to 700 effectively.
From my expeience, a decent shooter can wreak havoc with a ~100-years old Lee-Enfield at 5-600 yards and this one is superior. For those in doubt about hitting power, it comes in 308, 30-06 and my favorite 270.
But a 243 - an efficient 100 grain at 2900fps is nothing to shrug off. The bullet ballistics is excellent and recoil is so mild that a slight woman or a teenager can handle it no problem.

You can practice with mild, cheap loads – even led bullets at under 100fps and fight with full-power ones. No feeding/cycling problems, etc.
Heck, you can load sub-sonic rounds for situations where sound is an issue and so on. Versatility is a military virtue greatly under-appreciated.

miko

 

[Correia]

I've met Boston in person. He was a nice guy.

I do not agree with many of his conclusions in his book, but that is just my personal opinion.

Saiga .308 is by far the best bang for the buck in a .308 caliber MBR. $347 for a base gun. Around $700 for a Tromix custom. And I'm beta testing the 20 round magazines now. So far so good, and we should be shipping these before too much longer.

 

[Derby FALs]

There's a lot to be said about building your own FAL.

 

[Dirty Bob]

General agreement on the Garand. It's my choice for this role.

IMHO, you want a military rifle, in any case, for its reliability and resistance to abuse. I'd rather have a bolt action Enfield No.4 Mk1, for example, a than a semiauto or lever action that was built as a hunting rifle.

If money is extremely short, I think that a lot of us would be better off with a military bolt action, along with plenty of stripper clips, ammo and some training, than with a state-of-the-art semiauto, 2 mags, and just a few boxes of ammo.

Regards,
Dirty Bob

 

[MGKelly]

I have always felt that a well trained / practiced shooter with a well maintained SKS is far more dangerous to his targets than some plinker outfitted with the best Uber M1A or any rifle for that matter. Get what your budget will allow, make sure you keep it well maintained, and practice, practice, practice. I believe the Marines are right to still require their recruits to qualify at 500 yds instead of the Army method of hitting pop-up targets or what ever at varius but shorter ranges. We beat the North Koreans / Chinese with better marksmanship, vs. their mass assault with spray-n-pray tactics in the early 50's, but some seem to have forgotten those lessons. It's more whats behind the trigger than what the trigger is attached to.

Just my 48.3 cents worth (inflation )

MG

 

[marshall3]

You don't need a 500 yard rifle...

Unless you are a military sniper, you probably don't need a 500 yard rifle. And if there is a civil war in the USA, which is what Boston T. Party is getting at, and you think you can get out there and snipe at WHOEVER 500 yards away, you are dreaming. Of course, you may just like long-range marksmanship, which is great.

I read the Gun Bible, and it was a fun read. Great book, even if a little unrealistic.

But I think a Marlin 30/30, or a MAK-90, would serve any of us for hunting or home defense, and that's all you really need.

I bet a lot of us here could barely hike 500 yards and back to set up a target!

 

[funfaler]

Hey boxcab,

I regularly shoot both the M1a and FAL out to 500 yards, with iron sights, at a 20" steel target. It is a pretty easy skill to aquire (and a useful one). My personal opinion is this: The M1a makes it a little easier to hit at 500 yards with iron sights, and it is a simplistic, and accurate design. Out of the box, it has much better sights, trigger, safety, and charging handle than the FAL. A Springfield M1A is the only rifle I would mess with for a first M14 platform. The "cheaper" ones are just too iffy to trust, and the more expensive ones are not worth the $$ for an average shooter (if you get into matches you may want to spend the $$ later) A standard or "loaded" M1A can be had for 1200 if you keep your eyes open. I would have no fear buying used, most shooters will never come close to wearing out one of these rifles. You can buy CMI mags at $25 all day and they are the new USGI mags and work very well.

The FAL is a very good rifle, my "first love". With a little work, you can get a very good trigger, fair to good sights and a little better ergonomics. The mags can be had for $5 for good used ones, or $10 for good new ones. I would not feel "disadvantaged" at 500 yards with a FAL over a M1A. I would only buy one with a DSA or Imbel receiver, the others are not worth the $$ to risk ratio. With a DSA or Imbel, it will be worth the $$ to fix any problem that you may have with a new or used rifle. Many people sell their FALs because they don't know how to operate them (a little more difficult than the M1A, but not much), so you can sometimes fine a good deal. My favorite suggestion is a DSA Stg58, which is a "kit" gun built by DSA on a DSA receiver. A very good rifle for the $$, say $825-950. You will not have any problems with one of these if you buy new, or responsibly used. Imbels can be bought for @750, and will make a good rifle, but assembly quality can be hit or miss.

The real KEY in this decision, is the ammo. If you know you want a 308 battle rifle, get your ammo NOW! It is getting short in supply and high in price, buy all that you can afford now, save your pennies for the rifle. I don't think we will have to worry about the rifles being outlawed until '08. But surplus ammo is running short.

Enjoy which ever you choose! You really can't go wrong with either.

 

[spartacus2002]

500 yard battle rifle? I'd say M1A if you can swing the $$ for it and for a dozen mags. If you cannot swing that cash, get a CMP Garand and rebarrel it, swap out whatever parts look worn (worth sending it to Gus' Garands or DGR Guns or Warbird's Custom Guns for a tech inspection).

FALs are great, and I've owned one, but not as easy to sling it up for 500yard shots without affecting point of impact.

CQB, or a 200-yard get-home gun? 16" AR15 with M193 ammo.

 

[HorseSoldier]

For actual "battle" (versus imagined manly chest thumping and other silliness) -- M4. It's got long enough legs to snipe out to 4-600 meters if the shooter can manage it (whatever the fantasy, most folks aren't going to be picking off anyone at those ranges with irons). It's much better than a .308 for the way combat really happens.

 

[MechAg94]

The CMP Rack grade M1 will still be a reliable rifle. It may not have the accuracy of a higher grade, but that doesn't mean it won't work.

I have a service grade myself. If you get a new stainless steel spring and grease it properly, it will be a good rifle. You can also get ammo loaded in stripper clips and bandoliers for not a whole lot of money. No need to invest in a pile of magazines. I can appreciate that advantage. I have entirely too many semi-auto rifles and pistols that each demand a basic complement of mags and ammo.

Other than that, the Saiga rifles are spoken of very well. The PTR-91 is another good, reliable, and accurate rifle. I don't have an FAL but a lot of people like them.

As others have said, if you want anti-personnel capability, an AR 15 or AK will be very effective, lighter, and easier to shoot. If you get a higher class of AK, they will be more accurate. Also, I agree with others that you are not likely to be engaging targets out to 500 yards. It is unlikely you would identify a target that far away in the first place.

 

[beerslurpy]

How accurate is the 308 saiga? With a good bolt gun being a 10 and cheap AK being a 1, where does it fall?

 

[roscoe]

Saigas are consided ~2 MOA - mine is just about that (it's a .223). You can always mount a red dot if you don't like the AK style sights. I just left my Saiga as is and like it a lot.

I think it is by far the best deal in a semi-auto rifle other than the SKS. If you do some work to it, you can even make it ubertactical for pretty cheap. Folding stocks are available, as well as the new 20-round magazines.

 

[Boston T. Party]

A Rem 7400 in .243 is a decent deer rifle, but did you ever try
to disassemble one to replace a firing pin? Real fun...

For whatever your envisioned self-defense scenario, your rifle must be:

1) reliable and rugged
2) powerful (i.e., 1000fpe at distance)
3) <4MOA accurate
4) easily kept running
5) ergonomic

These characteristics are more science than art, and thus
quantifiable and comparable.

Once you've chosen a rifle which meets the above criteria, it
is more important to become trained and competent with it,
vs. quibble endlessly over FAL or M1A issues.

Caliber-wise, it is logical to field with the most common and powerful
option you can effectively shoot. If you can fight with a 7.62x51 about
as well as with a 5.56...then what compelling reason is there to
limit yourself to solely a 5.56? (I could see a 5.56 for a house/perimeter
carbine, but not much else. It's not a reliable caliber for even whitetail.)

Regarding my general scenario which would require use of a
battle rifle, nobody knows if such will ever occur. If it does,
then you'll be grateful to own a battle rifle. It it does not,
then you'll have had a lot of shooting fun along the way.

The odds are that a battle rifle will likely be more useful than not,
so owning one is the way to bet.

_________
Also, I do not "hate the police" and never have.
Whoever claimed that demonstrated his ignorance (about me, at least).

I'd have preferred that a combat vet or experienced street cop wrote
something like Boston's Gun Bible, but since they did not, I got tired
of waiting and wrote it myself. Time is short, and the eventually perfect
is the enemy of the presently useful.

Boston

http://www.javelinpress.com (Boston's books)
http://www.freestatewyoming.org (FSW website)
http://www.fundamentalsoffreedom.com/fswforum/index.php (FSW forum open to all)

 

[budney]

Where can one get a kit gun? I've Googled "FAL kit" and other variations, and found nothing--at least, nothing I could make heads or tails of.

--Len.

 

[kfranz]

Where can one get a kit gun? I've Googled "FAL kit" and other variations, and found nothing--at least, nothing I could make heads or tails of.

A kit gun is just a functioning rifle built from a demilled kit, compliance parts and a new receiver. You want FAL info? Go to www.falfiles.com

 

[Gewehr98]

That's always good for a giggle or two...

Will you be a cook or a rifleman?

For the SHTF hero who thinks they're going to hold off a well-trained and well-equipped army?

You'll be a smoking hole in the ground, a loosely-associated mess of organic material, dirt, and whatever's left of your sooper-dooper rifle, right there where the artillery shell(s) or precision-guided munitions landed. You won't notice the laser designator painting you seconds beforehand. Had there been time, the last thing that would go through your mind was "*** was that?! I didn't read about that in Unintended Consequences, nor did Fred/B.T.P. tell me about it! I want my money back..."

 

[budney]

For the SHTF hero who thinks they're going to hold off a well-trained and well-equipped army? You'll be a smoking hole in the ground...

I agree that it's absurd to think one will "hold off an army." Boston's version of "American Revolution II," however, doesn't involve direct conflict. It's modeled as an insurgency.

--Len.

 

[iamkris]

For the SHTF hero who thinks they're going to hold off a well-trained and well-equipped army?

I don't disagree...certainly won't hold off an army. Be a royal pain in the @$$ is about the best anyone could hope for...the only thing that could possibly work in doing that would be shoot 'n scoot. Get in and get out before they've had a change to bring the 40mm auto grenade launcher into the fight or call in air or artillery support.

Such fantasies of holding off the invading hordes are a little ridiculous.

 

[BADUNAME13]

Well, someone brought up combat vet.
Speaking as a combat vet:

A Single shooter CAN effectively harass a highly trained, superior equiped, military force which HAS air and arty support.
I've had it happen to me and it happens every day in Iraq.

A M4 is not reliable enough for combat, and the .223 takes 5-7 rounds centermass to put a haji down.

I have shot a M4 with reflex site in field conditions out to 400 meters (Unknown distance targets)
The only reason I was able to score hits was the intense training I was in the midst of. I do not think I could do it today.

I don't agree with everything Boston says... but His Gun Bible IS worth buying.

.30 does it for me.

Saiga .308 (No personal experence)
CETME (I'd rather not)
M1
M1A (You can find them ~ $1,000)

JMHO

 

[thegriz]

If you can't afford a "battle rifle" whatever that means...then you should consider how much it means for you to have one. Most of us spend upwards of $1,200 on a computer. Around $1,000 a year for cell phone service. Most people spend a lot of money on things. Lotta people spend an extra $500 every year just for premium packages on cable. The money is there, if you're willing to sacrifice a little.

Excellent comment. Most households view rifles as luxury items. I know a lot of "men" who have spent thousands of dollars of TV's, computers, video game systems, music devices and cell phones but have not spent one dollar to enable them to protect their families.

The saiga 308 if a very nice rifle. I love mine.

 

[Willard]

Regarding Boston's Gun Bible, I think pretty highly of it, particularly for neophytes. he approaches the firearms from the same perspective as I, or at least one as similar to mine as to remain in my comfort zone.
he admits his bias, unlike most gun writers who seem to be more advertising hacks than objective reporters, even if he likes Glocks!
I don't always agree with his conclusions, but who really wants to live in a world where everyone agrees n everyhting-besides the Dems? For soemone looking for serious social weapons he gives no advice that is stupid, ignorant, or dangerous. There is no chest thumping and what ego there is does not cause the focus of the tome to drift into ego's gravity. I also enjoy the none gun stuff.

For all I care he could have gotten all of the books information from the internet-which I'm sure he didn't. But where he got the info doesn't matter-he was smart enough to filter out the "bad" parts.

Myself, I recomend the FAL. I have used the M-14NM in match shooting and carried one as a designated marksman in Korea (way back when we were IN the DMZ) and I prefer the FAL. Based on what I've seen and have been reading M1A's of recent manufacture have some issues-mostly with bolt/extractor quality.
The FAL has everything located in the right spot for a battle rifle-you can hold the weapon in your firing hand and do everything else with your left.

If you think you are "slinging up" in combat then you are a little out of touch with reality, IMO.

The M-14/M-1A is a great target rifle. the sights of the M-1/14 are unequaled, in my experience, although they can and do fail, having so many parts. I've seen them fail on M-1's, 14's, M-1A's, and FedOrd M-14sa's. Usually they need to have their tension adjusted, but I have seen a few catastrophic failure (M-1 and M-14).


Of course, that's MY opinion. We all have one and they all stink. lol

 

[The-Fly]

Ok, I guess its time for me to piss on the camp fire

I don't buy into the hype that you have to have a 7.62 to be able to reliably defend yourself in the type of situations that Boston describes. While lots of people like to put down .223/5.56, i think its a capable caliber if you use the right ammo (I think the SS109 62gr is not a good anti personal round).

While I have not personally been in combat, I've talked to several USMC and Army personal who have recently, and they state that the 77gr SMK stuff drops people quickly. Also, I've seen law enforcement videos of suspects being shot center mass with 55gr M193 type ammo, and it drops them instantly.

I'm not saying 7.62 isn't a good round, it is. I'm not saying its not superior to 5.56 in terms of ballistics, it certainly is. But I DO think that if your getting in shorter distance engagements (under 200 yards), that 5.56 will do you just fine if you use a proper fragmenting type ammo.